sábado, 21 de julio de 2012

16: los donantes de izquierda se refugian en Elizabeth Warren

The New York Times nos cuenta que las donaciones de las bases liberales insatisfechas están encontrando refugio este año en la candidatura de Elizabeth Warren al Senado por Massachusetts. Aunque no lo tendrá fácil para ganar el escaño -las encuestas señalan un empate y su adversario, el Senador Scott Brown, tiene mucho carisma-, ya se habla de ella como posible candidata a la Casa Blanca en 2016.

Por su activismo en causas de izquierda -es una amante de los impuestos y las regulaciones financieras, además de una apasionada del aborto- y por el simbolismo que tendría recuperar el antiguo escaño de Ted Kennedy, estamos ante uno de esos casos en que un candidato, candidata en esta ocasión, adquiere una potente proyección nacional antes incluso de ganar una elección estatal. Sería Warren a la izquierda lo que fue Marco Rubio a la derecha en su elección al Senado.

Elizabeth Warren has been so prodigious in raising money for her Senate campaign in Massachusetts that she is on track to become the top fund-raiser for the Senate this year, as well as one of the top Congressional fund-raisers of all time.

Ms. Warren’s haul — $24.5 million so far — has already catapulted her to No. 15 on the list of most successful Senate money-raisers in history, according to an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics done for The New York Times. With more than three months to go before Election Day, she is likely to climb higher.

“She has become a darling for the left, and a lot of that money is incredibly frustrated and is looking for a place to go,” said Meredith McGehee, policy director of the Campaign Legal Center, a watchdog group in Washington.

Jon S. Corzine, a New Jersey Democrat, amassed $63.2 million in his successful 2000 Senate campaign, the most ever. But almost all of that came from his own wallet; Ms. Warren, by contrast, has not spent a dime of her own money. Excluding money put in by candidates themselves, Ms. Warren rises to No. 11.

Ms. Warren’s Republican opponent, Senator Scott P. Brown, has raised $19.9 million. Their combined tallies of more than $44 million could make the Massachusetts contest the most expensive Senate race in the country this year.

(...) Despite Ms. Warren’s clear fund-raising advantage, she and Mr. Brown are running neck and neck in the polls, a fact that underscores a hard reality for Ms. Warren: while she is popular across the country and has received contributions from all 50 states, the voters in 49 of those will not matter.

(...) About 60 percent of Ms. Warren’s contributions of more than $200 in the second quarter came from out of state, though Massachusetts was the state that gave her the most.

(...) Ms. Warren, a Harvard law professor who took on the financial industry and became the driving force behind the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, is a first-time candidate and jumped into the race less than a year ago. But though she was a campaign novice, her ability to raise money, especially among liberal national networks, was anticipated by many.

When her bid to become director of the consumer bureau failed, the liberal groups that were backing her switched their focus to encouraging her to run for the Senate.

“Showing grass-roots support was an important part of getting her to enter the race,” said Neil Sroka, a spokesman for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which started a draft Warren campaign before she announced an exploratory committee in mid-August. The group set up house parties for her in Massachusetts and has since raised $800,000 for her.

“The blogosphere was already supporting her,” said Stephanie Schriock, president of Emily’s List, which works to elect women who support abortion rights to Congress. Ms. Schriock met with Ms. Warren and helped her find staff. As soon as Ms. Warren officially entered the race on Sept. 14, Emily’s List raised more than $200,000 for her in two days — a total that has since grown to $958,000.

Ms. Schriock said this was the most money her group had raised this early for a Senate candidate.

(...) Tobe Berkovitz, a former Democratic media consultant who teaches at Boston University, said that part of Ms. Warren’s appeal was that she was “an unabashed liberal and has not been running away from any of the controversial liberal stands.”

“We’ll see how that plays in the election,” he added. “But for fund-raising, she is a star in big-money places like L.A., San Francisco, Washington and New York. She is the marquee name in terms of Senate candidates.”

2 comentarios:

Anónimo dijo...

Hombre, "apasionada del aborto" no es una palabra correcta para describir. No es que los pro-life sean pro-vida y que los pro-choice sean los pro-muerte.

Sebastián Sarmiento
Bloomington, Indiana

Antxon Garrogerrikabeitia dijo...

Si prefieres, "apasionada de la causa abortista".

A los que son defensores de la Segunda Enmienda se les dice apasionados de las armas, aunque algunos de ellos igual no hayan disparado nunca ni sientan pasión por usar un arma, y nadie se molesta.

Ella es una apasionada del aborto. Y que no se moleste.